Columbus Gay Realtor

NPR: The Dialogue Around Gay Marriage In Black Churches

2012-02-24T15:16:00.000-05:00

Here is NPR's Transcript

NEAL CONAN, HOST:

This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington. This week, the Maryland Legislature is expected to finalize approval of a bill to legalize same-sex marriage with a big push from Governor Martin O'Malley. If opponents can gather enough signatures after he signs it, the measure will go to a referendum in November.

As in other states, some of the most vocal opponents are African-American ministers. Many black preachers deplore gay marriage as a violation of scripture and worry about the potential effects on members of their congregations.

A smaller number support the idea, in part to open a difficult conversation about homosexuality in the black community. We want to hear from African-Americans in our audience today. Do you turn to your church for guidance on this issue? Give us a call, 800-989-8255. Email is talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.

Later in the program, TALK OF THE NATION's favorite movie buff Murray Horwitz joins us. Two of this year's best picture nominees are movies about the movies. So email us: What's your nominee for all-time best Hollywood-on-Hollywood picture? The email address again is talk@npr.org.

But first, Bishop Harry Jackson joins us here in Studio 3A. He's senior pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Maryland, and founder and chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition. Nice to have you back on the program.

BISHOP HARRY JACKSON: Thank you, sir, good to be with you.

CONAN: I know you've been active in opposition to this bill. If it passes, will you be among those to help gather signatures to put it on the ballot?

JACKSON: I certainly will. Many, many people are gathered against it, over 3,000 religious organizations representing over three-and-a-half million voters are right in line now to stand against this measure.

CONAN: And why is it that particularly the black community seems to be opposed to it?

JACKSON: Well, I think we are in a crisis in terms of the definition of marriage. And if we look at the marital breakdowns, children born out of wedlock, the institution of marriage on the main is on life support. Given that measure, we don't want to do this huge social experiment that may actually take the very last heart's beat out of this institution that is so vital to the perpetuity or carrying on our culture, our people and our work.

CONAN: As I'm sure you know, there are places like Massachusetts where gay marriage has been legalized for some time now, and the sky has yet to fall.

(SOUNDBITE OF LAUGHTER)

JACKSON: That's well-said. I think there are a lot of unintended consequences. There are parents who wanted to opt their kids out of school in Massachusetts at certain stages. They didn't want to have certain books read, "Heather has Two Mommies," et cetera. Some folks have even been expelled from the building by principals, challenged by the police.

So the ability to opt out of renewed education is not an option in many places. So if you change marriage, you change the definition of family. Change a definition of a family, of necessity it has implications with education. And I'm concerned not about the folks, what they're doing in their bedrooms, et cetera, I'm concerned more about what happens to those young kids next and how these fundamental institutions may be marred, in my view irreversibly.

CONAN: As you've noted, the institution of marriage, fewer and fewer people afford themselves of that institution, and in the black community in particular. Why would you then say these people who want to get married should not be allowed to?

JACKSON: Well, I wouldn't call this marriage by definition. Historic definition of marriage is a union between a man and a woman. Procreation is at the very heart of what we are called to do. It's the first institution ordained by God. And also, I believe that as we go down this road, we have not had enough history to see what might be, in my view, unintended consequences to this particular act.

So why this social experiment now? Why the pressure from a Governor O'Malley at this hour? Last year, we were able to block it successfully. This year, a lot of arm-twisting, pressures, measures I won't want to go into that I think are a little bit unethical politically, calls from Hillary and Bill Clinton last year, all kinds of things have gone on in this state just to move this thing down the road.

There are other issues we could be concerned about. Look at the economy. Look at people in education, Baltimore city, Prince George's County. We've got all kinds of issues.

CONAN: I don't deny that there are all kinds of issues in the state of Maryland.

JACKSON: Yes, sir.

CONAN: As you know, however, gay couples say they suffer discrimination. They are - pointed out they also suffer violence, and they wonder why a community that is so passionate about the rights that they fought for so hard for so long should deny them rights, too.

JACKSON: Well, I'm a resident of D.C. My church is in Maryland. I want to make that clear. We've fought against this thing in D.C., as well. I think the real issue is that it's the measure of what I'm going to call injustice. Recently in D.C., there is a whole change in divorce that has to happen. No longer is there a six-month requirement for both parties to be residents here. Now there's going to be an exception that all the gay people that got married want to get divorced really quickly.

CONAN: That's an overstatement, all the people.

JACKSON: Well, no, no, no, not all the people, forgive me. I didn't mean to say that - there are a lot of folk - and I thank you for the correction - but I think that what we're dealing with is we're tampering with these things as though this is some kind of Tinker Toy, and oh, we're overcommitted here, we'll dial it back a little bit there, and I think that's fundamentally unfair.

I think the people should have a vote on this. So I believe you'll see a lot of signatures and a referendum, and I believe that as it was in 31 times out to vote on this, there will be yet another victory should the opportunity to vote come to the people of Maryland.

CONAN: It would be interesting, there could be referenda on gay marriage not just in Maryland this year. There probably will be in Washington state, as well, Perhaps in New Jersey, and we know it's going to be on the ballot in Minnesota. So it's going to be a very interesting year.

JACKSON: But it's going to be interesting for a couple other reasons, and that is at the Supreme Court level, we all know it's headed that way. And if there's no pushback from Maryland and others, the Supreme Court is going to look and say: Hmm, have things really changed? How vociferous is the opposition at this time?

CONAN: Well, they might also look at opinion polls and say it looks like most people are now in favor.

JACKSON: Exactly. So it's important, I think, to both sides that at this particular time, folks will step up, let their voices be heard so democracy in action can really occur.

CONAN: We're talking with Bishop Harry Jackson, senior pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Maryland. And we'd like to hear from our African-American members of our audience. Do you turn to your church for guidance on the gay marriage issue? 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. And we'll start with Jay(ph), and Jay's on the line with us from Jacksonville in Florida.

JAY: Good afternoon.

CONAN: Hi.

JAY: First, I want to say that my church always stresses that love is the (technical difficulty), somebody is seeking to have a relationship that's based on love and mutual respect...

CONAN: Jay, did you just hit a button? We're having a hard time hearing you.

JAY: No, can you hear me now?

CONAN: Yeah, that's a little bit better, thanks.

JAY: OK. My church stresses love, that if somebody wants to have a committed, loving relationship with another person that it's not for us to judge the nature of their love or what's in their heart. I also want to add that the real threat to the black family is not allowing gay marriage, it's forcing people who are homosexual into the closet because that leads to families being broken up, that leads to children being beaten and abused. That leads to people leaving their family because they aren't being accepted because it's at odds with their faith.

So I see all of that as being much more dangerous than somebody who wants to get married, have a monogamous relationship and raise children.

CONAN: Bishop Jackson?

JACKSON: Well, it's hard to gauge the degree of sin, if you will. I simply would say I agree with the loving idea that we should be for people living their lives any way they want to live their lives. But I think we're dealing with a generational issue now of what will America become. What will Jacksonville and Maryland become in the days ahead?

And so we need to have some thoughtful, careful look at this thing. And I understand the caller's questions and concerns. I simply disagree with the fact that this measure legally is necessary. You've already got civil unions here in Maryland and many other places. It seems like we don't need to take this step, which so radically redefines everything.

CONAN: Just to follow up on Jay's second point: Do you have members of your congregation who are homosexual or lesbian or bisexual? And if so, what do you tell them?

JACKSON: Well, I don't have any members at this present time that are currently gays or lesbians. I've had a lot of people over the years who have some out of - I'm sorry - come out of that particular lifestyle. But our extended families need to have compassion and care for people who may disagree with how folk live their lives.

But I believe our folks are kindhearted enough not to judgmentally exit them from family affairs or some kind of persecutive kind of measures. This is about education, the next-generation children, what can - family configurations will look like. This is about what in the year 2050 America will look like. And I don't think it's about hate. I think it's about whether we want intentional design that is in accordance with whose view of morality.

CONAN: Jay - I'm sorry, I just want to give Jay a chance to come back.

JAY: Well, I think that I guess you raise a question of morality, and as I have studied this, I work in diversity and issues of equality and whatnot that that's always kind of way to make homosexuals, saying that somehow they are less moral. I guess...

JACKSON: No, that wasn't the intent. There is a specific code in our tradition of faith. That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to put anybody down. I'm just saying we have a right to believe the way we believe, especially if nobody is targeting or wanting to hurt folks of another lifestyle, choice or practice.

JAY: OK, I guess I'll just kind of finish up by saying is that faith is a cornerstone in our community, just as it is in many others. And that the problem becomes when somebody's faith and their lifestyle are at odds, that you said it's kind of hard to gauge degrees of sin. I believe it says that all sin is equal in the eyes of the lord. So the question is: Would you rather have somebody who is living a lie so that they can continue to operate in their faith or somebody who is being true and honest to what their heart and their mind and their spirit is telling them?

CONAN: And I don't mean to cut you off, Jay, but we just have a few seconds left.

JACKSON: Well, I disagree that all sin is equal, but I will say this to you: I love the way that you are reaching for fairness and equality, and I believe that others are doing the same thing. They simply have a different measure by which they evaluate the landscape.

CONAN: Jay, thanks very much for the phone call, we appreciate it. And Bishop Jackson, thanks very much for your time today.

JACKSON: Thank you so much. Pleasure to be with you.

CONAN: Bishop Harry Jackson, senior pastor of Hope Christian Church in Beltsville, Maryland, joined us here in Studio 3A. We're talking about gay marriage and the black church. Stay with us. I'm Neal Conan. It's the TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

CONAN: This is TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. I'm Neal Conan. As you just heard from Bishop Harry Jackson, who just joined us, black clergy in Maryland and around the country have what they contend are solid reasons to oppose gay marriage, reasons based in scripture and beliefs about the structure of African-American families.

Not all black pastors agree. We'll hear from one in just a moment. We also want to hear from our African-American listeners. Do you look to your church leadership for guidance on this issue? 800-989-8255. Email us, talk@npr.org. You can also join the conversation on our website. That's at npr.org. Click on TALK OF THE NATION.

Joining us now by phone from Phoenix is Reverend Delman Coates, senior pastor of Mount Ennon Baptist Church in Clinton, Maryland. Thanks very much for joining us today.

REVEREND DELMAN COATES: Thank you, Neal. That's Mount Ennon Baptist Church.

CONAN: Oh, forgive me. Last year, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage failed in the Maryland House, did not get to a vote. Now that it's passed, do you think you're on the cusp of achieving a victory here?

COATES: Well, I think so, but I think that victory is much broader than the specific piece of legislation. I've been able to support the Civil Marriage Protection Act because I believe that it's critically important in a pluralistic democracy that we don't use theology as a basis for public policy.

And so I believe - while there are well-intentioned people on all sides of this question, I think that it's a dangerous public-policy precedent to use one's subjective and personal theology as a basis for determining whether all citizens, and in this instance the residents of the state of Maryland, deserve the same basic civil liberties.

CONAN: Is your congregation unanimously in support?

COATES: Well, I don't think any congregation is unanimous on any issue. No, I've heard from a percentage of our members who, you know, who are opposed to this measure. But I would say that the overwhelming majority of our membership, certainly well in excess of 90 percent, 95 percent of those that I've heard from, applaud the stance that I've taken, that the question as a matter of public policy should not be what does our local church believe or affirm as it relates to marriage, but simply do our neighbors deserve the same basic civil liberties. And so they overwhelming understand that distinction.

CONAN: Those who advocate rights for gays and lesbians, transexuals and people who are bi, also argue that opinions begin to change when people that you love, you know are gay or lesbian or bisexual or transgender, that when your cousin or your uncle or your aunt or your teacher you learn is gay, then all of the sudden your opinions begin to change.

COATES: That's true. I mean, I do think that it's important that we not - it's easy to demonize people that you don't know. And I do believe that it's important for people of faith to have conversation and dialogue with, you know, a host of people whose choices and decisions they may not understand. So dialogue is critically important across ideological perspectives, racial lines, theological lines. It's very important to have, you know, ecumenical conversation, and I think that's to be encouraged.

But again, for me, you know, what I want to emphasize is that my support for this legislation is that it provides two things. It protects local faith institutions to define marriage, religious marriage in the way that they desire. So it protects, you know, religious freedom, and it protects individual clergy, yet at the same time extending equal rights and civil liberties to all of the residents of our state. And so were it not for those religious protections, then I wouldn't have been able to support it.

But I think the legislation has been crafted in a way that allows people to affirm whatever it is that they desire to affirm as a matter of their own faith and theology and yet, you know, provides for equal rights for others. Nothing is imposed on anyone.

CONAN: Just to clarify what you're saying, no church would be required, under state law, to marry people if they didn't agree to.

COATES: Absolutely, absolutely. And there are no repercussions that can be held against any clergyperson if they taught something that was different, they taught that, you know, marriage was between a man and a woman, and no repercussions against the institution or individual clergy. And I think the balance, the bill does a great balance protecting religious institution and religious freedom yet providing civil liberties, as well.

CONAN: Does it also afford the opportunity, and as Bishop Jackson suggested, it's very likely this is going to be on the ballot as a referendum item in November, but does it also afford the opportunity to open a dialogue in the African-American community where sometimes conversations about homosexuality are not always welcome?

COATES: There's no question that there's going to be ongoing dialogue about this topic. I see it already in the responses that I've received from colleagues of mine on both sides of this question. And I think that that dialogue is good. I think it's healthy. And as long as it's done constructively and compassion, I think it's good.

It's going to provide a greater opportunity for people in our communities to receive the kind of hope and healing and help that we all need rather than viewing our churches and religious institutions as a place for - of condemnation and judgment.

I would like to say something about the referendum notion, if I could.

CONAN: Sure.

COATES: I believe that issues of human rights and constitutionality should not be submitted to - we should not base them on public consensus. If slavery had been submitted to referendum, if segregation had been submitted to referendum, then I and many residents of our communities, minorities, wouldn't have many of the opportunities that we have, perhaps.

When it comes to issues of constitutionality, and I believe that's what the federal appeals court said recently as it relates to Prop 8 in California, that when it comes to issues of constitutionality and human rights, these are not issues that should be adjudicated by public consensus.

If it's an issue of recreation, like let's say slots or casinos coming to a particular community or state, I can understand that. But I think that we should be very hesitant about rushing to submitting such an issues to referendum.

CONAN: Let's get a caller in on the conversation. Wanda's(ph) on the line with us from Orlando.

WANDA: Yes, the question was asked: Is the discussion of homosexuality discussed in my church? And I would say yes, it is. And it's understood that God is not pleased with that. That's what the word of God says. And if you are a believer, either you believe the word to be true, or it isn't.

You can't stand one - I mean, you can't stand on the fence. You have to make a decision. Secondly - excuse me - there are homosexual - or people who struggle with that, who do come to the church, but they realize that they must make a decision as to where they stand in that faith.

God has given us all a measure of faith, but we are able to overcome anything if our belief is in Christ. So - and also I want to say the first caller, Jay, said that all sin is equal. Well...

CONAN: I think he said all sinners are equal, but...

WANDA: Homosexuality is the only thing that he says that is an abomination in his eyes.

CONAN: You're quoting from Leviticus then?

WANDA: Yes.

CONAN: As - look, I'm the last person to argue scripture, but I was just looking it up earlier today. Leviticus also says that we should not eat fork and that blasphemy should be punished by death. We don't do either of those things.

COATES: Neal, you raise a great point, and I want to thank the caller for the sentiments she expressed. The real question is whether people of faith ought to legislate their belief or whether they should live in their belief. My belief, my view is that we ought to live in our faith, not legislate it because the question becomes whose interpretation of the Bible, whose understanding of scripture, which scripture, which religion is going to be the basis for public policy.

I think this is a very dangerous precedent. I think it's very sincere. I think it's well-intentioned, but I think practically, even within, you know, the Christian community, within the faith community, we want to make sure that we protect the public square from private and subjective religious belief.

If 300 years from now, I believe your prior presenter talked about the future, if 300 years from now Christians were in the minority and not the majority, we want to make sure that their right to practice their faith is protected and preserved by whomever is the majority at that time.

And I believe it is the responsibility of every majority in a democracy to protect the rights and liberties of the minority. And so I - my view, I would slightly differ from your caller. I don't believe that the goal is to legislate our faith. If we're going to do that, if we're going to deny rights to those because they committed some sin, I mean, how far are we going to go with that?

As you mentioned, Neal, are we going to legislate those who, according to Leviticus, eat pork, who eat shellfish?

WANDA: But this is a totally different issue, and what we're talking - and we talk about civil rights. It's amazing to me how the homosexual community has taken on that whole issue as if it means the same as what African-Americans had to go through. They don't. First of all, I look at it as a white liberal thing, that they just - they found another way to push their agenda. And if when a white male or a white female go someplace or whatever, they're not discriminated against.

They're openly accepted, however - yes. They say they come out as a homosexual whatever, while they may face some type of discrimination, but on the whole, they're still accepted. And it is different from being an African-American. And, for me, I don't understand why they would take such a (unintelligible).

COATES: I didn't use the term civil rights. I used the term civil liberties.

CONAN: Yes. But there is resentment, and Wanda articulated it. And we've heard it from other callers on other programs in the past, that the language of civil rights is being applied to a situation where people, like Wanda, say this doesn't apply. It's not the same.

COATES: Well, I think what - I think, yes, I have heard this as well, but what people need to understand, in my opinion, is that the civil rights movement was a subset of a broader ethical and moral fight for human rights. So the civil rights movement that Dr. King and others sought to advance, does not mean that African-Americans have a monopoly on civil liberties. All Americans of all backgrounds are part of the human family. Dr. King situated his movement within a broader - a vision for human rights. And this one movement, the civil rights movement, should in no way be regarded as a way to delimit this fight and the struggle for human rights.

CONAN: Wanda, thanks very much for the phone call. Appreciate it.

COATES: I also would say, if I could, Neal, that gay and lesbians, you know, are in all races. You know, whites are not the only ones who are gay and lesbians. We have gays and lesbians in all of our communities - Asian, African-American, Latino. And so I would - I think that we should have a broader understanding and vision.

CONAN: Nicole from Baltimore emailed, I think, to that point. I grew up in an African-American church in Baltimore. There are a number of not-so-closeted gay individuals within the black church, and many of them hold positions as ministers of music, choir directors, et cetera. It's been quietly condoned and accepted for decades or longer, and the black clergy knows it. I don't think the church leaders speak for a majority of their followers. I truly believe it will take only a little outreach to the black Christian community to change the minds of many more parishioners, if not the clergy.

We're talking about the African-American church and gay marriage. You're listening to TALK OF THE NATION from NPR News. And let's get Nick on the line. Nick with us from Wilmington, North Carolina.

NICK: Yes. Thank you so much for taking my call. Your first presenter, one of the things I first wanted to say is I thought it was interesting that the same arguments he was using that we shouldn't experiment with this. What our country is going to be like in 20 years or 15 years or 30 years? Those same arguments that he was using were used against African-Americans, you know, 50-something, 60-something years ago. And so what has happened to our country.

Well, now, we have more families, and we have biracial families, and we have biracial children. And we're just as good a country as we were before. I also find it interesting - and people always slam our current president for this - we are not a Christian nation. Everybody in this country is not Christian. And we do not all believe in the Bible. And even that being said, I find it very interesting that lady will quote a scripture from Leviticus, but then the minute you give another scripture - oh, no, no, no, wait.

This is something different. It's always odd to me how convenient parts of Scripture are used when it's for their benefit. If you're going to accept the whole book, then you accept the whole book, and not just parts of it. I can never get over the fact that people who are not gay or lesbian or bisexual, which I'm not, but like that lady talked about - they do not get discrimination. How do you know? How do you know what kind of discrimination they face? How do you know that my friends in Atlanta, Georgia, were jumped just two weeks ago for holding hands while walking down the street - two gay men?

How does she know that? She is inside her little closed bubble, protecting herself from the Bible with selective scriptures that meet her needs. And I'm using her as a general term for Christians, not picking on that young lady. But these same exact arguments were used by small-minded people against African-Americans with - less than a century ago. And they're using those same type of arguments. And it's just that I live in North Carolina. North Carolina is getting ready to try to pass a bill to go ahead and make it illegal for gays to get married.

We're going to go ahead and make a hate law. Why don't we just go ahead and do that in advance? And it's very, very frustrating. I love the comments the gentleman's making now. We're talking about people's not civil rights, and blacks don't own the civil rights. But why are we so filled with hate? Why do we care? The first gentleman you had said, oh, no one in my congregation is gay. Well, as he was the leader of your congregation, of course, no one is going to admit they're gay.

That was a ridiculous statement. But the same arguments were used years ago against making rights available for blacks and for other minorities, which gay and lesbians are a minority right now, unfortunately. And how can you as a Christian, loving person say that two loving individuals should not be able to do that? And it's not always a moral issue. There's legal issues involved as far as federal rights, tax breaks, Social Security issues. It's not all about religion.

CONAN: I just - Nick, thanks very much. We appreciate the phone call. I wanted to add this email from Marilyn. I'm an African-American Christian who goes to church every Sunday. I do believe homosexuality is a sin, just like lying, overeating, gossiping et cetera. Because of my personal belief, I may not support a same-sex marriage bill. However, it's not my job to judge anybody. I will never treat anyone different because of their sexual orientation, just as I don't want anyone to treat me differently because of my race. And, Reverend Coates, maybe we ought to leave it there.

COATES: That's a sentiment that a lot of people are sharing, and I think your prior caller is really pointing out the irony that the people whose experience in this country know oppression and discrimination are many of whom now are using the language of oppression and discrimination to deny rights for others.

CONAN: Reverend Coates, thanks very much for your time today.

COATES: Thank you.

CONAN: Reverend Delman Coates, the senior pastor of Mount Ennon Baptist Church in Clinton, Maryland. He joined us on the phone from Phoenix, Arizona.

Columbus Dispatch: Five-story apartment building proposed for N. High St. in Weinland Park

2012-02-22T16:31:00.000-05:00

By Mark Ferenchik

The Columbus Dispatch Sunday February 19, 2012 5:45 AM

The story is here

A five-story apartment building geared toward graduate students and young professionals might go up along N. High Street between the Short North and Ohio State University this year.

City leaders hope that the building will spur other projects to fill in the gaps along High Street, but some neighborhood leaders and residents fear that the building might make too big of a statement.

“We haven’t seen the last request for more density along High Street,” said Susan Keeny, the zoning chairman of the University Area Commission. “In some areas, it’s not appropriate.”

The city’s Board of Zoning Adjustment approved a variance in January to allow a building as tall as 75 feet in the area zoned for buildings no taller than 35 feet. The University Area Commission had voted against it.

The developer, Kohr Royer Griffith, could break ground at the northeast corner of N. High and E. 7th Avenue in the Weinland Park neighborhood by fall, if architectural reviews and other issues can be resolved by then, said John Royer, the company’s president.

The building would go up along the street, adding a similar urban look to the streetscape as the new Kroger store, located just to the south. “Our location is a very key component to trying to keep the Short North and campus and Downtown merging together,” Royer said.

The building’s 86 apartments would be on the top three floors. The second floor and part of the first floor would be for parking. Plans also call for ground-level retail stores, including a pharmacy.

Columbus Planning Administrator Vince Papsidero said the city wants to see more high-density, mixed-use developments along High Street to connect the Short North with the South Campus Gateway area and the Ohio State University campus.

“We definitely want to see that kind of density take place on a commercial corridor,” Papsidero said. “If you want to have successful neighborhood retail, you have to have housing within walking distance.

And although residential neighborhoods border High Street, the area needs more housing to strengthen the retail corridor, he said.

University Area Commissioner Tom Wildman said he fears that the project will encourage more like it.

City staff members who reviewed the proposal reported that the building would not be out of character for the area and pointed to the five-story buildings at the South Campus Gateway less than a half-mile to the north and the eight-story Jackson on High condominiums just to the south in the Short North.

A 2002 plan for the area calls for a one- to three-story building on the site, but “It doesn’t reflect today’s economic realities,” Papsidero said. He said younger people want to live in denser urban areas, and plans should be updated to reflect that.

Commission members spent years developing plans for the area along High Street as a footprint to guide developers, Wildman said. “This company, they have absolutely ignored the guidelines and decided to build whatever they want to build.”

The developer would tear down a building housing a Dollar Tree store and a laundry, and eliminate a large surface parking lot to make way for the project.

Laura Bidwa, vice president of the Weinland Park Community Civic Association, said some Weinland Park residents are concerned about losing those businesses and that the new units would cost too much for many in the neighborhood.

Campus Partners, Ohio State’s nonprofit development arm, has always envisioned closing the gap between the Short North and the South Campus Gateway, which it developed, said Campus Partners President Doug Aschenbach.

Many people would find the building an attractive place to live, he said. “I think there is a demand for living in the urban environment that goes beyond undergraduate students.”

Columbus Dispatch: Apartments driving Columbus rebound

2012-02-22T16:22:00.001-05:00

Apartments driving Columbus rebound

Developers filling in spaces near Downtown

Story is here

Rising numbers of new-building permits and zoning applications in Columbus bode well for two things: the local economy and controversy.

Development has been rebounding since the end of the recession, officials, developers and neighborhood leaders agree, although it hasn’t come close to the boom times of the 1990s and early 2000s.

In 2001, for example, Columbus annexed 1,230 acres, nearly 2 square miles. Annexations reached a low of 19.4 acres in 2009 and in 2011 edged up to 146 acres, including 108 acres for the Hollywood Casino on the West Side.

“They were taking in, back in the heyday, plots of a couple hundred lots at a time,” said Chris Presutti, the city’s chief zoning official, “and they were building the houses before they were even sold.”

Today, he said, most development is infill development — meaning it typically occurs inside the city, not at the edges, and in smaller batches to fill in empty spaces.

Single-family homes and large shopping centers once were king, but today’s projects are smaller and more likely to be rentals.

“If you look at where the residential is being built, it’s infill development in Franklinton or the Near East Side and places like that,” Presutti said.

Becky Obester, chairwoman of the 5th by Northwest Area Commission, said she’s seeing a burst of such development in her neighborhood, which is tucked between Upper Arlington and Grandview Heights.

The Columbus City Council just signed off on zoning changes for 16 new rental units, a request that also has her group’s approval.

There’s also plenty more development in the parts of Nationwide Realty’s Grandview Yard development that are in Columbus.

“Our liaison with the city of Columbus told our zoning chair we’re one of the busiest areas in the city,” Obester said. “Our zoning committee works really hard. We try not to have a lot of controversies. We try to keep it moving forward and ask, ask, ask, ask.”

That’s not to say that controversy — which was common in the days when residents frequently packed City Council meetings to fight new subdivisions, malls and drugstores — won’t come in with the current tide of infill development.

Last month, residents of two neighborhoods — one in Clintonville and the other in Harrison West — filled the council chamber to fight separate infill developments.

One of those was a 108-unit apartment complex proposed by Wagenbrenner Development in Harrison West. The City Council approved the project despite residents’ concern that it would place too many apartments in the space.

It’s the type of project that’s becoming more common as developers realize that the rental market is robust. In the core city, said Mark Wagenbrenner, president of the development company, apartment complexes are 97 percent full, and one-bedroom apartments are almost impossible to find.

Wagenbrenner has infill projects, including hundreds of apartments, in the works in several neighborhoods, many of them on reclaimed industrial land. It doesn’t make sense, he said, for plots that were originally planned for owner-occupied housing to stay that way.

“What you see is people reworking multifamily condo ground for apartments,” Wagenbrenner said.

“That’s going to create tensions. There’s a perception that rental always tends to impact value. That’s true in the suburbs. But in an urban area, we’ve always had a mix of owner-occupied and rental. From a demographic standpoint, we just don’t see any difference.”

In other words, the young professional who was buying a condominium with little credit checking in 2005 is the same person who wants to rent an apartment in today’s tougher credit and housing markets.

“When you’ve gone through the housing crisis we’ve just gone through, people aren’t interested in ownership,” Wagenbrenner said.

Business First: Middle West Spirits doubling up with distillery expansion

2012-02-22T15:59:00.003-05:00

Middle West Spirits LLC founders Ryan Lang, left, and Brady Konya plan to more than double the size of their Courtland Avenue plant.

The story is here

Central Ohio’s first microdistillery is getting a little less micro.

Middle West Spirits LLC plans to more than double the size of its 1230 Courtland Ave. plant, an expansion that will double the capacity of the almost 2-year-old spirits maker.

“Demand for our artisan Oyo products has grown so quickly we’ve outgrown our current space in less than 18 months,” co-owner Brady Konya said in a press release. “Currently we distill, bottle and ship our spirits in a facility that also includes office space and a retail area. We really need 8,000 to 9,000 square feet to meet that growing demand.”

Konya and Ryan Lang opened Middle West in 2010.

Construction is scheduled to start March 1, adding 4,200 square feet to the existing 3,200-square-foot facility. The added space will allow the addition of new distilling equipment and create more room for on-site storage.

The focus will be on more production of brown liquors like whiskey. The Oyo brand lineup includes Vodka, Honey Vanilla Bean Vodka, Whiskey and Stone Fruit Vodka, and is sold in Ohio, Kentucky, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Maryland and Washington D.C. Expansion into Indiana and Florida is expected this summer.

Konya said the expansion is necessary to improve the economies of scale for the business, which he said is squeezed by high state and federal taxes. Middle West has been an advocate of several legislative changes to make the microdistilling business more profitable, including Ohio House Bill 243 that reduced restrictions on the nascent industry and freed up producers to provide samples. The current target is the federal excise tax. House Resolution 777, co-sponsored by U.S. Rep. Steve Stivers (R-Columbus), would bring taxes on microdistilleries in line with those on wineries and microbreweries.

“Highly regressive tax structures at both the state and federal levels make it incredibly difficult to produce and distribute spirits locally and still make a profit,” Konya said. “The federal excise tax for distilleries is (17 times) that of a microbrewery or small winery — which also enjoy graduated tax schedules based on production volume. The tax we pay on each bottle is (four times) the cost to produce the product itself and exceeds the entire cost of overhead to run and operate the company.”

Advocate: HRC's Joe Solmonese Named National Co-Chair for Obama Campaign. Ted Strickland also chosen.

2012-02-22T15:05:00.001-05:00

HRC's Joe Solmonese Named National Co-Chair for Obama Campaign

By Andrew Harmon

The story is here

The Obama campaign has tapped outgoing Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese for a national co-chair position.

Solmonese, who is scheduled to exit the national LGBT organization next month (a successor has not yet been named), is one of 35 co-chairs announced early Wednesday by campaign officials.

The varied list includes Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick, Caroline Kennedy, actress Eva Longoria, and former White House chiefs of staff Bill Daley and Rahm Emanuel, who was elected mayor of Chicago one year ago this week.

HRC endorsed President Obama for reelection in May of 2011, 18 months prior to the November election.

Citing the president’s record on such accomplishments as “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal and hate crimes legislation, Solmonese said in a statement, “President Obama has made it clear that LGBT Americans deserve a fair shot and has taken steps across his Administration to make the lives of those most in need in our community better. As a national co-chair, I am determined to do whatever I can do to help reelect President Obama so this progress can continue for our community."

The full national co-chair list, via Obama for America:

• Lynnette Acosta – OFA volunteer leader from Florida
• Marc Benioff – CEO of Salesforce.com
• Senator Michael Bennet – U.S. Senator from Colorado
• Mayor Julian Castro – Mayor of San Antonio
• Governor Lincoln Chafee – Governor of Rhode Island
• Ann Cherry – Retired teacher and OFA volunteer leader from North Carolina
• Representative Judy Chu – Representing the 32nd District of California
• Representative Emanuel Cleaver – Representing the 5th District of Missouri
• Bill Daley – Former White House Chief of Staff to President Obama, former U.S. Secretary of Commerce
• Maria Elena Durazo – Executive Secretary-Treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO
• Senator Dick Durbin – U.S. Senator from Illinois
• Mayor Rahm Emanuel – Mayor of Chicago
• Senator Russ Feingold – Former U.S. Senator from Wisconsin
• Representative Charles A. Gonzalez – Representing the 20th District of Texas
• Loretta Harper – High School Counselor and OFA volunteer leader from Nevada
• Attorney General Kamala Harris – Attorney General of California
• Sai Iyer – Student at Virginia Commonwealth University and OFA volunteer leader from Virginia
• Caroline Kennedy – Author/President of the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation
• Eva Longoria – Actress and Philanthropist
• Felesia Martin – OFA volunteer leader from Wisconsin
• Bishop Vashti McKenzie – African Methodist Episcopal Bishop
• Attorney General Tom Miller – Attorney General of Iowa
• Kalpen Modi – Actor/Former White House Associate Director for the Office of Public Engagement
• Admiral John Nathman – Retired U.S. Navy Admiral
• Governor Deval Patrick – Governor of Massachusetts
• Secretary Federico Pena - Former U.S. Secretary of Transportation and U.S. Secretary of Energy
• Elaine Price – Retired Ohio resident and OFA volunteer leader from Ohio
• Penny Pritzker – Founder and CEO of PSP Capital Partners
• John Register – U.S. Army Veteran and Paralympian
• Representative Jan Schakowsky – Representing the 9th District of Illinois
• Senator Jeanne Shaheen – U.S. Senator from New Hampshire
• Joe Solmonese – President of the Human Rights Campaign
• Alan Solow – Partner at DLA Piper LLP and past Chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations
• Governor Ted Strickland – Former Governor of Ohio
• Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa – Mayor of Los Angeles